User talk:Seicer

This is my talk page! Heres a few tips: Click the [+] tab to leave me a new message or reply under an existing thread, Sign your comment by using four tildes (~~~~), Feel free to ask me any questions or leave me any comment you wish! This talk page is open for anyone to support, comment about, or criticize any of my current or prior actions. Archives: 2006 | 01 | 02 | 2007 | 03 | 04 | 2008 | 05 | 06 | 07

Get well

Seicer, thank you for your mediation on Cold Fusion. I understand that you have (had) some nasty illness (recently). I hope you'll get well soon. Pcarbonn (talk) 13:23, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

No problem. I look forward to working with you on Cold Fusion. I've done some general queries that will add in some of the (many) missing citations. I've also used a 2006 version of Cold Fusion, as it was much more exhaustive in terms of text and featured far more citations -- after coming out of FA. I felt that even if it was somehow an "incorrect version," it was at least easier to take apart and examine. Seicer (talk) (contribs) 03:58, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

Thank you

Thank you for participating in my RfA! It was closed as successful with 58 supporting, 0 opposing, and 2 neutral. I hope to demonstrate that your trust in me is rightly placed and am always open to critiques and suggestions. Cheers. MBisanz talk 04:05, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

Best pic I've seen

RfM of Cold Fusion

I don't know where to start beyond deleting the whole thing. I mean:

• A: it's a copyright violation
• B: from a fringe publication
• C: that characterizes the article in its worst throes of pro-CF excess.

Why depart from editing the Featured Article version? JohnAspinall (talk) 01:32, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

I've removed two instances of copyright vios., and will continue to review it to ensure that there are no others. I don't know if it is considered as much as a fringe publication as much as some of the other sources, per discussions held earlier. I feel that it is at least worthy to include, given that it explains much of the background history of Cold Fusion, which is not as controversial as the latter sections. The version that the History follows is essentially the Featured Article version, but taken from a Good Article nominee from 2006. It features much more sourcing and explainaton over the 2008 version, and is slightly better than from the Featured Article, in my opinion.

Would it be okay to continue on with other section editing with either the FA or GA-nominee version? Seicer (talk) (contribs) 01:40, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

I am willing to give it a try, but I predict slow progress. Thank you for your efforts. JohnAspinall (talk) 03:39, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

Also note, that I've left it up to anyone involved with Cold Fusion to edit, so if you see a copyright vio., feel free to remove it, use strike through, refactor it, etc. Seicer (talk) (contribs) 01:42, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

USRD Newsletter - Issue 2

Want to help on next month's newsletter? Don't want to receive these in future? Want to change your method of delivery? – It's all here. —O bot (t • c) 03:31, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

Because things get rough

Cheeser1 (talk) has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Cheers, and Happy editing!
Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.